Connect with us

Opinion

The Oracle: Disputes Between States and the Federation: Examining the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (Pt. 3)

Published

on

By Mike Ozekhome

INTRODUCTION

In our last discourse on this series, we delved deeper into the constitution of the apex court (Supreme Court) with regards to its membership and how it affects its jurisdiction. We also x-rayed how the subject matter of a case determines a court’s jurisdiction and the conditions precedent to assumption of jurisdiction by a court. Today, we shall continue and conclude on the apex court’s power of jurisdiction and thereafter take a look at the definition of a federation; The Federation” Vs “Federal Government of Nigeria”: The Link and the Principles for the Invocation of the Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. Please read on.

“Dispute” For The Purpose Of Invoking the Original Jurisdiction of the Supreme Court (Continues)

In A.G. OF THE FEDERATION V. A.G, OF ABIA STATE & 35 ORS, (2001) 11 N.W.L.R. (PL. 725) pg. 689 at 737 the word ‘dispute’ was defined by my Lord S.M.A. Belgore, J.S.C., C.J.N. (as he then was), as follows: “To my mind, a dispute involves acts of argument, controversy, debate, claims as to rights, whether in law or fact, varying opinions, whether passive or violent or any disagreement that can lead to public anxiety or disquiet. I will not close the category of disputes.” Suit No. S.C. 27/2010: (2011) 8 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1248) 31 at 166-167. A dispute is a conflict of claims or rights or demands on one side met by contrary allegations on the other side.

In A.G ABIA v. A.G FEDERATION, Suit No. SC. 73/2006: (2007) 6 N.W.L.R. (Pt. 1029) 200 at 219-220. Tabai, J.S.C. held thus: “With respect to the construction given to the word “dispute”, the opinion of the Court (Per Belgore, J.S.C. as he then was) is quite apposite in determining the issue of this Court’s jurisdiction in this case. On page 701 he said of “dispute” thus: ‘…A dispute is a dispute whether apparent or lingering. It is remarkable that in the counter-claims to the suit some States have admitted there is a dispute. This Court in Attorney- General of Bendel State V. Attorney-General of The Federation; (1981) 10 S.C. 1; (1982) 3 N.C.L.R. 1 Attorney-General of The Federation V. Attorney-General of Imo State, (1983) 4 N.C.L.R. 178 set out clearly what is a dispute to the extent of using authoritative English dictionary. To my mind, a dispute involves acts of arguments, controversy, debate, and claims as to rights whether in law or fact, varying opinions, whether passive or violent or any disagreement that can lead to public anxiety or disquiet.’”

The same Belgore, J.S.C. (as he then was) had earlier in A.G, OF THE FEDERATION v. A.G OF ABIA STATE, & 35 ORS (2001) 11 N.W.L.R. (PL. 725) 689 at 737, held, inter alia, that the term dispute as used in section 232(1) of the 1999 Constitution “…Involves acts of arguments, controversy, debate, claims as to rights whether in law or fact, varying opinions, whether passive or violent or any disagreement that can lead to public anxiety or disquiet.”

In his view, C.J.N. (rtd.) in the case of ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION V. ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF ABIA STATE & 35 Ors Ibid, at pp 728-729, adumbrated as follows:
“What constitutes a dispute under Section 212 subsection (1) of the Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria, 1979, which has exactly the same provisions as Section 232 subsection (1) in question had been considered by this Court in the cases of ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF BENDEL STATE V. ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION & 22 ORS, (1982) 3 N.C.L.R. 1, and A.G OF THE FEDERATION V. A.-G OF IMO STATE & 2 ORS. (1983) 1 S.C.N.L.R. 239; (1983) 4 N.C.L.R. 178. In ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF BENDEL STATE’S case, Bello, J.S.C., (as he then was), stated as follows on pp. 48 to 49 thereof:- “To invoke the original jurisdiction of this Court there must be a dispute as so qualified between the Federation and a State or between States. The issue of jurisdiction was contested on three grounds Firstly, there is no dispute which affected the interest of the Federation and Bendel State between the plaintiff (Bendel State) and the Federation, Secondly, I think the first point may be easily disposed of from the definition of the word “dispute, The Oxford Universal Dictionary defines it as ‘the act of arguing against, controversy, debate, contention as to rights, claims and the like or on a matter of opinion… I also held as follows on p. 320 thereof. It is a well-established principle of the interpretation of the Constitution that the words of a Constitution are not to be read with stultifying narrowness- UNITED STATES V. CLASSIC, 313 U.S. 299, and NAFIA RABIU V KANO STATE (1980) 8-11 S.C. 130 at pp. 148-149. The word ‘dispute in section 212(1) should therefore be given such meaning that will effectuate rather than defeat the purpose of that section on the Constitution. Webster’s New Twentieth Century Dictionary, 2nd Edition, provides that “dispute is synonymous with controversy, quarrel, argument, disagreement and contention.”

Disputes Between States And The Federation: The Legal Position
Section 232 (1) of the Constitution confers exclusive jurisdiction on the Supreme Court to adjudicate disputes between States and the Federation. In order to appreciate this provision, it is expedient to examine what a Federation means.

“Federation”- Meaning

In A.G LAGOS STATE v. AG FEDERATION & ORS, 2014) LPELR-22701(SC), at pp 129-130, Pars A-A. Per KUDIRAT MOTONMORI OLATOKUNBO KEKERE-EKUN, JSC on the definition of “Federation”, held thus:
“Section 318 (1) of the 1999 Constitution (as amended) defines “Federation” as follows: “Federation means the Federal Republic of Nigeria.” In A.G. Kano State vs A.G. Federation, Ibid this Court per Mahmud Mohammed, JSC, relying on the definition of “Federation” within the meaning of Section 232 of the 1999 Constitution, which bears the same meaning in Section 212 of the 1979 Constitution, differentiated between Federation (or the Federal Republic of Nigeria) and the Federal Government thus: Section 212 of the 1979 Constitution under which the word “Federation” was defined is in pari materia with the provisions of Section 232 of the 1999 Constitution now under consideration. I therefore respectfully adopt the definition of the word “Federation” in Section 232 of the 1999 Constitution as bearing the same meaning as the ‘Federal Republic of Nigeria.’ By this meaning…all the complaints of the plaintiff in its statement of claim in the present case must be viewed as being against the Federal Republic of Nigeria in order to bring the case within the purview of Section 232 of the Constitution. In other words, any complaint against the Government of the Federation or any person who exercises power or authority on its behalf like the Inspector General of Police as asserted by the learned senior counsel for the plaintiff in his address before this Court, is completely outside the original jurisdiction of this Court.”

“The Federation” Vs “Federal Government of Nigeria”: The Link

For a better understanding of the meaning of the word “Federation”, the Supreme Court, per EMMANUEL AKOMAYE AGIM, JSC, only recently emphasized the distinction between the “Federal Government of Nigeria” and the “Federation” in A.G OF KADUNA STATE & ORS v. A.G OF THE FEDERATION & ORS (2023) LPELR-59936(SC); at Pp 22 – 24 Paras F – C., thus:
“So much heavy weather is made about the distinction between the Federation and the Government of Nigeria that exercises its executive powers. That distinction no doubt has a constitutional basis. But since the Government of the Federation exercises the executive powers of the Federation, there is, legally and practically speaking, hardly a dividing line between the acts of the Government of the Federation and the acts of the Federation. The distinction does not exist to the extent of turning the Government of the Federation into a sovereign that can act without regard to the Federation. The Government of the Federation is not sovereign. It is a creation of the Constitution for the purpose of exercising the executive powers of the Federation. The Federation is inherently the sovereign and its sovereignty is further established by S.2(1) and (2) of the 1999 Constitution which provides that- (1) Nigeria shall be one indivisible and indissoluble sovereign state to be known by the name of the Federal Republic of Nigeria. (2) Nigeria shall be a Federation consisting of States and the Federal Capital Territory, Abuja. The sovereignty enjoyed by the Federation is owned by several individual persons constituting the people of the Federation of Nigeria who own the lands that together form the territory of Nigeria. S. 14(2) of the 1999 Constitution acknowledges this ownership by declaring that- (a) Sovereignty belongs to the people of Nigeria from whom government through this Constitution derives all its powers and authority. (b) The security and welfare of the people shall be the primary purpose of the government, and (c) The participation by the people in their government shall be ensured in accordance with the provisions of this constitution.”

The implication of the above decisions is that, for the Supreme Court to assume jurisdiction, it must be a dispute between the Federation and a State or between States.

Principles For The Invocation Of The Jurisdiction Of The Supreme Court
Many actions between states and the Federation have failed as a result of the failure to appreciate the thin line that grounds the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court laid this confusion to rest in the case of ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF ANAMBRA STATE v. ATTORNEY-GENERAL OF THE FEDERATION, (2007) LPELR-24343(SC) where, per, WALTER SAMUEL NKANU ONNOGHEN, JSC, held at pages 95 – 97, Paras F – C), that:
“The Constitution is very clear on when the Supreme Court will invoke its original jurisdiction on a matter. Section 232 of the 1999 Constitution provides: “232(1) the Supreme Court shall, to the exclusion of any other court, have original jurisdiction in any dispute between the Federation and a State or between States if and in so far as that dispute involves any question (whether of law or fact) on which the existence or extent of a legal right depends. (To be continued).

Thought For The Week

“Presidents come and go, but the Supreme Court goes on forever”. (William Howard Taft).

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Opinion

The Architectonics of Influence: Leadership, Power, and Deliberate Pursuit of Possibilities

Published

on

By

By Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD

“Leadership envisions the future, Power builds it, but only Control ensures it endures. In their deliberate synergy lies the architecture of all human progress,” – Tolulope A. Adegoke, PhD

Introduction: The Tripartite Foundation of Progress

At the heart of every significant human achievement—from the ascent of a thriving corporation to the resilience of a prosperous nation and the self-actualization of an individual—lies the potent interplay of three fundamental forces: Leadership, Power, and Control.

These concepts are often conflated or misunderstood. Yet, their distinct roles and synergistic relationship form the very bedrock upon which possibilities are envisioned and delivered. Leadership provides the vision and the compass; power furnishes the engine and the tools; and control ensures the steering and the governance. Together, they create an “architectonics of influence,” a deliberate framework for building a better future across all sectors of human endeavor.

Deconstructing the Core Concepts

  1. Leadership: The Compass of Purpose

Leadership is not merely a position; it is a process of social influence that maximizes the efforts of others toward achieving a goal. It is the domain of vision, inspiration, and emotional intelligence.

  • For Peoples: Leadership manifests as mentorship, parenting, and community organizing. It empowers individuals to transcend their limitations, fostering personal growth, resilience, and a sense of agency.
  • For Corporates: Leadership sets the strategic direction, cultivates culture, and inspires innovation. It is the force that aligns diverse talents toward a common mission, navigating market volatility and competitive pressures.
  • For Nations: Leadership, at its best, articulates a national destiny, unites citizens around shared values, and steers the country through crises and opportunities on the global stage.
  1. Power: The Currency of Action

Power is the capacity to influence the behavior of others or the course of events. It is raw potential energy that, in itself, is neutral—its morality defined by its application. French and Raven’s classic bases of power provide a useful lens:

  • Coercive & Reward Power: (Sticks and Carrots) Effective in the short term but often unsustainable, as they rely on external compliance rather than internal commitment.
  • Legitimate Power: Derived from a formal position or title (e.g., CEO, Prime Minister).
  • Expert Power: Granted based on knowledge, skills, and competence.
  • Referent Power: The most potent form, earned through charisma, respect, and admirable qualities.

 

  1. Control: The Rudder of Stewardship

Control represents the systems, processes, and ethical frameworks that guide the application of power. It is the essential counterbalance that prevents power from becoming corrupt, arbitrary, or inefficient. Control is not about restriction, but about direction and stewardship.

  • Mechanisms of Control: These include transparency, accountability, checks and balances, legal and regulatory frameworks, ethical codes of conduct, and performance metrics.

The Synergistic Equation: Leadership + Power + Control = Delivered Possibilities

The true impact occurs when these three elements are harmonized. Leadership without power is impotent; power without leadership is directionless; and both without control are dangerous.

The Formula for Impact: A visionary leader (Leadership) must wield appropriate forms of power (e.g., Expert and Referent) to mobilize resources and people. This application of power must then be channeled through robust control mechanisms to ensure it is effective, ethical, and aligned with the overarching goal. This synergy unlocks possibilities.

The Perils of Imbalance:

  • Leadership without Power: The inspiring visionary with no authority or resources becomes a frustrated prophet, their ideas never materializing.
  • Power without Leadership: The powerful but visionless authority figure (a tyrannical manager, a despotic ruler) creates chaos, stifles innovation, and leads to oppression or organizational decay.
  • Power without Control: This is the definition of tyranny and corruption. It leads to the abuse of resources, the suppression of dissent, and ultimately, systemic failure (e.g., corporate scandals, state collapse).

Delivery Across Sectors: Peoples, Corporates, and Nations

  1. For Peoples: The Realm of Personal and Community Agency
  • Leadership: Self-leadership—taking responsibility for one’s own growth and actions. Community leaders articulate a shared vision for neighborhood improvement.
  • Power: The power of knowledge (Expert), the power of a strong network (Referent), and the collective power of organized action.
  • Control: Personal discipline, ethical codes, and community-agreed rules of engagement.
  • Delivered Possibilities: Empowered individuals achieve self-actualization. Cohesive communities solve local problems, foster social capital, and create environments where people can thrive.
  1. For Corporates: The Engine of Innovation and Value Creation
  • Leadership: The CEO and C-suite set a compelling vision and culture. Middle managers translate strategy into action and empower their teams.
  • Power: Legitimate power of hierarchy, expert power of specialized teams, and the referent power of a strong brand and respected leadership.
  • Control: Corporate governance, board oversight, compliance departments, performance management systems, and a strong ethical culture.
  • Delivered Possibilities: Sustainable profitability, market innovation, employee engagement and well-being, and long-term value for all stakeholders.
  1. For Nations: The Framework for Collective Prosperity and Stability
  • Leadership: Elected officials, civil servants, and a judiciary that provide direction, uphold the law, and steward national resources.
  • Power: The sovereign power of the state, derived from the consent of the governed (Legitimate), and exercised through institutions (military, judiciary, executive).
  • Control: The Constitution, separation of powers, an independent judiciary, a free press, transparent elections, and anti-corruption watchdogs.
  • Delivered Possibilities: Economic development, social justice, national security, public health, and the preservation of fundamental rights and freedoms—the foundation for a flourishing society.

The Indispensable Role of Control: From Stewardship to Possibilities

Control is the often-overlooked hero in this narrative. It is the difference between a dictator and a statesman, between a reckless conglomerate and a sustainable enterprise.

  • Control Fosters Trust: Transparent and accountable systems build trust among citizens, employees, and investors, which is the currency of long-term collaboration.
  • Control Enables Scalability: Without control mechanisms, organizations and nations cannot grow beyond a certain size without descending into inefficiency or chaos.
  • Control Mitigates Risk: It provides the early warning systems and corrective actions that prevent catastrophic failures.
  • Control Ensures Legitimacy: Power is seen as legitimate and worthy of support when it is exercised within a known and fair framework.

Conclusion: The Call for Conscious Stewardship

In a world of increasing complexity and interconnectedness, the deliberate and ethical management of leadership, power, and control is not a theoretical exercise—it is a practical imperative.

The ultimate delivery of possibilities—be it a child reaching their potential, a corporation pioneering a world-changing technology, or a nation achieving lasting peace and prosperity—rests on our collective ability to:

  1. Cultivate Leaders who are not only visionary but also humble, ethical, and empowered by referent and expert power.
  2. Wield Power consciously, recognizing its sources and its profound responsibility.
  3. Design and Uphold Control systems that are robust yet adaptable, ensuring that power is always a force for creation, not destruction.

The future does not simply happen; it is built. It is architected by those who understand that true, lasting power is the capacity to unlock human potential, and that the highest form of leadership is the stewardship of possibilities for all.

Dr. Tolulope A. Adegoke, AMBP-UN is a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) in History and International Studies, Fellow Certified Management Consultant & Specialist, Fellow Certified Human Resource Management Professional, a Recipient of the Nigerian RoleModels Award (2024), and a Distinguished Ambassador For World Peace (AMBP-UN). He has also gained inclusion in the prestigious compendium, “Nigeria @65: Leaders of Distinction”.

Continue Reading

Opinion

How Glo Network Became the Lifeline That Saved Two Lives: A True Story from Sallari

Published

on

By

By Dr. Sani Sa’idu Baba

It was one of those calm, bright mornings in Sallari, a town in Tarauni Local Government Area of Kano State. I had gone to visit my longtime friend and colleague, Dr. Muhammad Umar Abdullahi, at his private facility, Rauda Clinic and Maternity. We were in his office discussing research, the usual challenges of medical practice, and other issues when the sound of hurried footsteps and anxious voices broke the calm. A young man rushed in, calling for the doctor.

Without hesitation, Dr. Muhammad sprang into action. I followed him instinctively. Within moments, two people burst through the gate, one man carrying a weak, heavily pregnant woman in his arms. Her breathing was shallow and wheezy, her face pale, and her body trembling between labor contractions and an asthma crisis. The scene was intense, we both knew that every second counted.

The team quickly moved her to the emergency bed. The Chief Medical Director Dr. Muhammad and his nurses worked swiftly to stabilize her breathing and monitor the baby. Oxygen was connected, IV lines were set, and within minutes, her breathing began to steady. The baby’s heartbeat was strong. After a short but tense period, she delivered a healthy baby girl. Relief filled the room like a gentle wind.

At that moment, I couldn’t help but admire the efficiency and dedication of Rauda Clinic and Maternity. The facility operated with the precision and compassion of a modern hospital. Every member of the team knew their role, every piece of equipment was in place, and the environment radiated calm professionalism. It reminded me that quality healthcare is not only about infrastructure, but about commitment and readiness when it truly matters. Rauda Clinic stood out that day as a quiet pillar of excellence and hope for patients and families alike.

The following day, I placed a call to Dr. Muhammad to ask about the condition of the woman who had been brought in the previous morning. He sounded cheerful and relieved. “Both mother and baby are fine now,” he said. Then, with deep reflection in his voice, he narrated the extraordinary story behind their survival, a story that showed how a single phone call, made at the right moment, became the bridge between life and death. As I listened to him recount the events, I couldn’t help but marvel at how sometimes, survival depends not only on medicine but also on connection.

Her name was Amina, a mother of three. That morning, she was alone at home, her husband was in Dutse, the capital of Jigawa state where he works, and her children had already gone to school. The first wave of pain came suddenly, followed by a tightening in her chest. Within minutes, she was gasping for air, her asthma worsening with every breath. She reached for her phone to call her husband, but the call wouldn’t go through. She tried again and again, each time, “Network error.”

Her strength was fading fast. She tried to reach her neighbors, but again, no connection. Alone, frightened, and struggling to breathe, she said she felt her end was near. Then, a thought crossed her mind, her maid had left her phone in the sitting room that morning. Gathering the last of her strength, Amina crawled toward the television stand where the phone lay.

When she reached it, she noticed the green SIM icon, it was a Glo line. Hope flickered. But when she tried to make a call, she saw there was no airtime. That could have been the end until she remembered Glo’s Borrow Me Credit service. With trembling fingers, she dialed the Glo borrow me code and she got the credit instantly, and that small credit became her lifeline.

Her first attempt to reach her husband failed. Then she dialed her younger brother, Umar. This time, the call went through immediately. Interestingly, Umar is a Glo user too. Without delay, Umar and his wife rushed to her house, found her collapsed on the floor, and carried her into their car.

On their way, Umar called ahead to alert the doctor, and again, the call went through clearly. By a remarkable coincidence, Dr. Muhammad was also using a Glo line. That seamless connection meant the hospital team was fully prepared by the time they arrived. Within minutes, Amina was stabilized, and both she and her baby were safe.

The next morning, Dr. Muhammad told me that Amina had smiled faintly and said to him, “Doctor, when every other network failed me, Glo answered. If that call hadn’t gone through, I wouldn’t be here today.”

Her words carried a truth that stayed with me. It wasn’t just a patient’s gratitude, it was a testimony about the power of reliable connection. At that moment, Glo wasn’t just a telecommunications network, it was the bridge between life and death, between despair and hope.

In today’s world, a simple phone call can determine whether someone lives or dies. That day reminded me that technology, when dependable, is not just about data speed, it’s about human connection at its most critical. Glo proved to be that connection: steady, available, and trustworthy when it mattered most.

Before she was discharged, she laughed and told the doctor she had already chosen a nickname for her baby “Amira Glo.” They both laughed, but deep down, Dr. Muhammad understood the meaning behind that name. It symbolized gratitude, faith, and survival.

As I ended the call with Dr. Muhammad that day, I felt a quiet pride. I had witnessed not just the miracle of life, but the harmony of medicine, compassion, and reliable technology. Through Rauda Clinic and Maternity, I saw what true service means, dedication without boundaries, and connection that saves.

Amina’s story isn’t an advert, but living proof that sometimes, when every other signal fades, Glo stands firm, and when every other facility seems far away, Rauda Clinic and Maternity remains a beacon of care and excellence.

For patients, families, and health workers alike, Glo is proven to be a network of necessity. It connects life to hope, when every second truly counts…

Dr. Sani Sa’idu Baba writes from Kano, and can be reached via drssbaba@yahoo.com

Continue Reading

Opinion

Faith, Power, and the Art of Diplomacy: Nigeria Must Respond to Trump’s Threat with Strategy, Not Emotion

Published

on

By

By Joel Popoola

Nigeria’s President Bola Tinubu has never worn religion as a badge and never been defined by religious identity. Though a Muslim, married a Christian Pastor, he has long been known for his ability to balance Nigeria’s complex religious landscape. As former governor of Lagos State, he founded the Lagos State Annual Thanksgiving Service, a remarkable initiative that became one of the largest Christian gatherings in the Southwest Region. That gesture was not political theatre; it was an act of statesmanship that celebrated Nigeria’s diversity. He attended as a servant leader of all people, Christian, Muslim, and otherwise setting a tone of unity that our federation still needs today.

Today, that inclusive spirit, and legacy of tolerance faces, a renewed wave of external scrutiny, and a new kind of test- one not from within, but from abroad. The U.S. President Donald Trump’s decision to designate Nigeria as a “Country of Particular Concern” over alleged Christian persecution was more than a foreign policy statement. It was a calculated political signal. His subsequent threat to “use the military to defend Christians in Nigeria” crossed a dangerous line, suggesting that America could unilaterally intervene in our internal affairs based on a distorted interpretation of Nigeria’s religious dynamics.

A Complex Reality Misunderstood
There is no denying that Nigeria faces violent flashpoints where religion is entangled with ethnicity and poverty. But it is intellectually lazy and diplomatically reckless to label these crises as “Christian persecution.” Successive Nigerian governments, both Muslim- and Christian-led, have condemned extremism and taken act against those who inflame division. Trump’s posture, however, ignored the facts. It reframed Nigeria’s domestic challenges as a global crusade, inviting a moral panic that oversimplifies and endangers. The real tragedy is that such mischaracterizations can embolden extremists, fracture communities, and damage Nigeria’s reputation on the world stage.

Diplomacy Is Strength, Not Submission
As a corporate diplomacy expert, I have seen how scenario-based-strategy, not outrage determines outcomes. Whether in global business negotiations or international relations, power is not exercised only through might; it is asserted through credibility, alliances, and skilful communication. Nigeria must resist the temptation to respond defensively and instead deploy smart diplomacy to reframe the narrative. History offers compelling evidence of how diplomacy can avert even the gravest conflicts. During the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, the world stood seconds away from nuclear war. Yet, through quiet negotiation between U.S. President John F. Kennedy and Soviet Premier Nikita Khrushchev, a peaceful resolution emerged: the Soviet Union withdrew missiles from Cuba, and the U.S. reciprocated by removing its own from Turkey. Dialogue, not force, saved the world.

Nigeria can apply the same principle today. The path forward lies in strategic engagement, leveraging bilateral relations, regional blocs like ECOWAS and the African Union, and international platforms to clarify its realities. Nigeria must lead the conversation, not react to it.

A Lesson from Leadership

When a Muslim governor created a Christian thanksgiving celebration, he embodied what diplomacy looks like at home: listening, inclusion, and respect. Nigeria’s leaders must now display those same qualities abroad. We cannot control how others view us, but we can control how we present ourselves. That is the essence of diplomacy, proactive communication grounded in national dignity. Trump’s rhetoric may have been provocative, but Nigeria’s best response is composure, not confrontation. Power is never just about weapons or wealth; it is about narrative, legitimacy, and alliances.

The Diplomat’s Way Forward

Nigeria stands at a defining moment. The challenge is not to prove that Christians are safe, Muslims are fair, or that America is wrong, it is to prove that Nigeria is capable of solving its own problems with balance and foresight. True diplomacy is not silence; it is strategic communication. It is the ability to turn political provocation into an opportunity for partnership. If Nigeria channels its response through professionalism, restraint, and intelligent diplomacy, it will not only protect its image, but it will also strengthen its global standing.

As someone who has studied and practiced the intersection of corporate influence and international relations, I know these same principles that sustain global brands, trust, transparency, and consistency, also sustain nations.

And in this moment, Nigeria must choose those principles, not fear, and not anger- to defend its sovereignty and its soul.

Joel Popoola, a Corporate Diplomacy Expert, and Managing Partner at Anchora Advisory, specialising in corporate diplomacy and internationalisation, writes from United Kingdom 

Continue Reading

Trending